Trump administration seeks to remove protections for administrative law judges

The move has broader implications for the independence of federal agencies.

The Trump administration has argued that US President Donald Trump has the constitutional power to fire administrative law judges at will, bypassing a statute designed to protect such officials from being removed without cause, according to a letter sent to Congress, as reported by the New York Times.

Background of administrative law judges 

Administrative law judges (ALJs) preside over hearings in various federal agencies, handling issues like Social Security disputes or labour practice cases. While these judges are executive branch officials, they have judicial functions, including ruling on legal and factual matters. To protect them from political influence, a law stipulates that ALJs can only be removed for “good cause,” as determined by the Merit Systems Protection Board, a body designed to prevent political interference.

The Trump administration's stance 

In a letter from Acting Solicitor General Sarah M. Harris, New York Times noted, the administration disclosed its approach to challenging the law protecting ALJs. Harris noted that the Justice Department had filed a brief in February, arguing that the president should be able to remove ALJs without cause, referencing a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that struck down a similar statute restricting presidential control over agency board members.

The legal implications 

The move has broader implications for the independence of federal agencies. Harris pointed out that Congress had given the Merit Systems Protection Board, rather than the president, the authority to determine if an ALJ should be fired. The board itself is insulated from direct presidential control, making the administration's position a challenge to civil service protections.

Broader context 

This action aligns with the Trump administration’s embrace of the unitary executive theory, which argues that the president should have total control over the executive branch. The administration’s stance has sparked numerous lawsuits as it challenges statutes that limit presidential power, including protections for inspectors general, civil servants, and other officials.

Political reactions 

Chad Mizelle, Chief of Staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, praised the administration’s challenge, arguing that ALJs have held too much power without accountability. He emphasized that, under this challenge, executive branch officials would be accountable to the president and, by extension, the people.